Please choose from the list of thinking partners to the left
Description
Prompt
Choose a tab, then select your Thinking Partner
Cancel
Which is more helpful, honest, and harmless?
Original
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit?
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Resubmission
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit?
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Alexandra Veverka(Jun 23 2016 2:27AM):
A philosophy for living on earth
more
So looking at Ayn Rand you might assume she’s just some extremist, and frankly kind of a bad person. But, with closer look there is what i would argue that there is method to her madness, and in it you will find very hardcore kind of savage view but all in all they are undoubtedly outsider, even rebellious. But I firmly believe that because her ideas were created not as a selfish frenzy but as a accepted philosophy, that she is a visionary in opening a window for future generations to contemplate altruism and other perspectives even if you don’t necessarily agree
Connor Jenkins(Jun 23 2016 2:42AM):
Agree or Disagree with Ayn Rand?
more
Ayn Rand’s ideas and philosophy on the surface may easily come across as contradictory. She believes in individual rights but also proposes a completely laissez-faire economic system. These proposals are fallacies because in a laissez-faire economic system, people can be easily manipulated and controlled by a sole source for markets, and this monopoly means that people are unable to exercise their right to economic freedom and opportunity. Further, the premise that a laissez-faire economic system would be fair is quite incorrect; by simply taking a look at American history, one can easily see that Americans do not have a great track record with protecting the rights of minorities. One simply must take a look at the Dred Scott and Plessy v. Ferguson Supreme Court decisions to see that Americans do not uphold individual rights of the minority (in these cases, of African-Americans) as long as the majority is satisfied. Additionally, one must recognize that at the time of these Supreme Court decisions, the United States strictly followed an economic system of laissez-faire from the establishment of the New Republic through the Antebellum Period and into the Gilded Age of the late-19th century. Also occurring in these time periods were the subjugation and oppression of any and all minorities from African-Americans and Southeastern Europeans to women and the LGBTQ+ community. It does not take much examination to see that these minority groups are in no way economically empowered by laissez-faire capitalism but rather are completely excluded and exploited. Further, she promotes an ideology that completely rejects altruism and goodwill, a notion that completely negates the basis of the American ideal of protecting minority rights and the oppressed that is so engrained in the American fiber. Finally, her ideas and propositions were quite dangerous in the post-WWII period as Nazism and fascist sentiments were still practiced by many; Ayn Rand’s ideals were ones that would easily be used to promote Nazism since the Nazis promoted the extermination of multitudes of minority groups. Ayn Rand was most definitely a rebel and extremist, and due to the tumultuous nature of global politics at the time of her publications, it was dangerous and reckless to promote such ideals that could have re-birthed a movement rooted in hatred, racism, and oppression.
Gavin Woolard(Jun 23 2016 3:24AM):
Is selfishness really a virtue?
more
What Ayn Rand proposed was selfishness. She saw it as a virtue; she saw that you did not have to do most things unless it made yourself happy. In the article, it stated that morality does not require you to sacrifice a bit of your happiness in order to aide in someone else’s wellbeing. In order for most people to do this, they would have to completely disregard empathy. Personally, I think that our ability to imagine what other people are feeling, and how we would feel in their situation is one of the defining attributes that make us human; to simply disregard the concept of empathy, like she believed, would take away one of the main characteristics that make us who we are.
Desktop/Laptop: double-click any text, highlight a section of an image, or add a comment while a video is playing to start a new conversation. Tablet/Phone: single click then click on the "Start One" link (look right or below).
Click "Reply" on a comment to join the conversation.
0 General Document comments
0 Sentence and Paragraph comments
0 Image and Video comments
So looking at Ayn Rand you might assume she’s just some extremist, and frankly kind of a bad person. But, with closer look there is what i would argue that there is method to her madness, and in it you will find very hardcore kind of savage view but all in all they are undoubtedly outsider, even rebellious. But I firmly believe that because her ideas were created not as a selfish frenzy but as a accepted philosophy, that she is a visionary in opening a window for future generations to contemplate altruism and other perspectives even if you don’t necessarily agree
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
Ayn Rand’s ideas and philosophy on the surface may easily come across as contradictory. She believes in individual rights but also proposes a completely laissez-faire economic system. These proposals are fallacies because in a laissez-faire economic system, people can be easily manipulated and controlled by a sole source for markets, and this monopoly means that people are unable to exercise their right to economic freedom and opportunity. Further, the premise that a laissez-faire economic system would be fair is quite incorrect; by simply taking a look at American history, one can easily see that Americans do not have a great track record with protecting the rights of minorities. One simply must take a look at the Dred Scott and Plessy v. Ferguson Supreme Court decisions to see that Americans do not uphold individual rights of the minority (in these cases, of African-Americans) as long as the majority is satisfied. Additionally, one must recognize that at the time of these Supreme Court decisions, the United States strictly followed an economic system of laissez-faire from the establishment of the New Republic through the Antebellum Period and into the Gilded Age of the late-19th century. Also occurring in these time periods were the subjugation and oppression of any and all minorities from African-Americans and Southeastern Europeans to women and the LGBTQ+ community. It does not take much examination to see that these minority groups are in no way economically empowered by laissez-faire capitalism but rather are completely excluded and exploited. Further, she promotes an ideology that completely rejects altruism and goodwill, a notion that completely negates the basis of the American ideal of protecting minority rights and the oppressed that is so engrained in the American fiber. Finally, her ideas and propositions were quite dangerous in the post-WWII period as Nazism and fascist sentiments were still practiced by many; Ayn Rand’s ideals were ones that would easily be used to promote Nazism since the Nazis promoted the extermination of multitudes of minority groups. Ayn Rand was most definitely a rebel and extremist, and due to the tumultuous nature of global politics at the time of her publications, it was dangerous and reckless to promote such ideals that could have re-birthed a movement rooted in hatred, racism, and oppression.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
General Document Comments 0
What Ayn Rand proposed was selfishness. She saw it as a virtue; she saw that you did not have to do most things unless it made yourself happy. In the article, it stated that morality does not require you to sacrifice a bit of your happiness in order to aide in someone else’s wellbeing. In order for most people to do this, they would have to completely disregard empathy. Personally, I think that our ability to imagine what other people are feeling, and how we would feel in their situation is one of the defining attributes that make us human; to simply disregard the concept of empathy, like she believed, would take away one of the main characteristics that make us who we are.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment